Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2018 7:43:10 GMT
I think you made a lot of great points in your post lostinlimbo and what I would love to see are more Horror comic books like 'Hack/Slash', 'Monstress', 'Darkchylde', 'Vampirella', 'Wonderland (Zenescope), 'Faust', and 'Lady Death' adapted into Live Action movies and I think with the right writers 'Hack/ Slash' could not only be a success but one of the most popular slasher franchises in years. Cassie Hack and Vlad are awesome characters and I don't know if you have read the comic books but they feature Cassie and Vlad going around killing slashers and saving people and there are a number of Horror movie icons that have appeared in them too. There was a movie of 'Darkchylde' in development a few years back and John Carpenter was set to direct it and he called it one of the greatest Horror stories he read and said Ariel Chylde had the potential to be one of the most popular Horror characters of all time but the studio sadly didn't go through with it due to the way comic books with female leads were viewed at the time but now with 'Wonder Woman' I think they should try again but I think 'Hack/Slash' deserves a movie the most. The late Wes Craven and Tobe Hooper called it a masterpiece and Wes Craven wanted to adapt it but sadly didn't get around to it. Bring On Cassie Hack!!!
I definitely agree. There is indeed a rich comic universe out there to explore, and it’s definitely more imaginative than the film industry. So it should be a goldmine for adaptations, but I also guess copyright issues, and royalties play a big part of it and some probably won’t find an audience beyond its niche followers. But you never know if you don’t try I would love to see “Vampirella” as the 90s film didn’t do it much justice. “Faust” too. I’ve seen “Hack/Slash” in stores, but yeah, I’m not familiar with the stories or characters. But it sounds like a cool spin on the horror material. Even a TV series could work. Fantastic to see those horror directors at one point of time attached, or showing interest in these projects, and source material. I didn’t relaise how much of a fan Carpenter was of the comic world until I read one of his introductions for a Batman graphic novel expressing his admiration of Steve Niles and Kelley Jones’ work. Yeah. Horror comic books do have a very rich universe to explore and I think they should give it a try 'cause some of them could flop but others could be very successful and spawn their own movie franchises and it is no different than what they are doing with superhero movies now so they should give them a chance. I know quite a few Vampirella fans that would love to see a 'Vampirella' movie or TV show based on some of the 'Vampirella' comic books in the past decade under Dynamite Entertainment and there was talk of adapting a TV show before but it sadly never came to be. Next year marks the 50th anniversary of Vampirella and it is sad the only movie we have had of her didn't do the comic books justice and was poorly written and I heard the studio were party to blame for that 'cause they kept making Jim Wynorski make changes to the script and when 'Blade' came out two years later he said in an interview that was what his 'Vampirella' movie was originally supposed to be like but it was seen as being too dark and serious. I think under the right writers now a 'Vampirella' movie or TV show could work but they would probably have to alter her costume.
The 'Faust: Love of the Damned' movie was very disappointing too and after reading the comic books I was expecting something far darker, bloodier, gorier and violent which would have really pushed the boundaries with what they could and couldn't have in movies but a lot of fans I know hated it 'cause they watered it down too much. Have you heard there is a 'Razor' movie in development? Rob Cohen is directing it and Emma Dumont (From Marvel's 'The Gifted') is playing the leading role and Rob Cohen has said it isn't going to be watered down and the studio behind it have already said they think it has the potential to be a movie franchise and have given the green light to a movie of the spin-off 'Strike' which is Razor (Nicole's) sister. I have heard a few famous Horror directors and writers are big fans of comic books and Stephen King has praised up Horror comic books in interviews and said they were very influential on his career as an author. 'Hack/Slash' is one of my favourite comic book series of all time and is worth checking out and you can buy the original series now in Omnibus form and volume one of the new series, 'Hack/Slash: Resurrection' in graphic novel form on Amazon.
|
|
egon1982
Sophomore
@egon1982
Posts: 994
Likes: 268
|
Post by egon1982 on Sept 26, 2018 21:09:20 GMT
I definitely agree. There is indeed a rich comic universe out there to explore, and it’s definitely more imaginative than the film industry. So it should be a goldmine for adaptations, but I also guess copyright issues, and royalties play a big part of it and some probably won’t find an audience beyond its niche followers. But you never know if you don’t try I would love to see “Vampirella” as the 90s film didn’t do it much justice. “Faust” too. I’ve seen “Hack/Slash” in stores, but yeah, I’m not familiar with the stories or characters. But it sounds like a cool spin on the horror material. Even a TV series could work. Fantastic to see those horror directors at one point of time attached, or showing interest in these projects, and source material. I didn’t relaise how much of a fan Carpenter was of the comic world until I read one of his introductions for a Batman graphic novel expressing his admiration of Steve Niles and Kelley Jones’ work. Yeah. Horror comic books do have a very rich universe to explore and I think they should give it a try 'cause some of them could flop but others could be very successful and spawn their own movie franchises and it is no different than what they are doing with superhero movies now so they should give them a chance. I know quite a few Vampirella fans that would love to see a 'Vampirella' movie or TV show based on some of the 'Vampirella' comic books in the past decade under Dynamite Entertainment and there was talk of adapting a TV show before but it sadly never came to be. Next year marks the 50th anniversary of Vampirella and it is sad the only movie we have had of her didn't do the comic books justice and was poorly written and I heard the studio were party to blame for that 'cause they kept making Jim Wynorski make changes to the script and when 'Blade' came out two years later he said in an interview that was what his 'Vampirella' movie was originally supposed to be like but it was seen as being too dark and serious. I think under the right writers now a 'Vampirella' movie or TV show could work but they would probably have to alter her costume.
The 'Faust: Love of the Damned' movie was very disappointing too and after reading the comic books I was expecting something far darker, bloodier, gorier and violent which would have really pushed the boundaries with what they could and couldn't have in movies but a lot of fans I know hated it 'cause they watered it down too much. Have you heard there is a 'Razor' movie in development? Rob Cohen is directing it and Emma Dumont (From Marvel's 'The Gifted') is playing the leading role and Rob Cohen has said it isn't going to be watered down and the studio behind it have already said they think it has the potential to be a movie franchise and have given the green light to a movie of the spin-off 'Strike' which is Razor (Nicole's) sister. I have heard a few famous Horror directors and writers are big fans of comic books and Stephen King has praised up Horror comic books in interviews and said they were very influential on his career as an author. 'Hack/Slash' is one of my favourite comic book series of all time and is worth checking out and you can buy the original series now in Omnibus form and volume one of the new series, 'Hack/Slash: Resurrection' in graphic novel form on Amazon.
Yes Styx needs to do Hack and Slash as a movie series and can be something fun.
|
|
Flynn
Sophomore
@flynn
Posts: 515
Likes: 270
|
Post by Flynn on Sept 29, 2018 16:24:40 GMT
The way I see it, '80s horror icons have earned their right to be a mainstay of the horror genre just like the Universal monsters. Dracula, Frankenstein, et. al. have reappeared in a twenty-year cycle since the 1930s. We have the originals in the '30s, Hammer's versions in the late '50s, remakes that largely didn't spawn follow-ups in the '70s and then again in the '90s, and most recently Universal's failed updates in the 2010s. Sometimes they stay around for a while, like Hammer's slew of sequels in the '60s and '70s, and sometimes they fizzle out due to poor execution or lack of interest.
There's no reason slasher icons can't return periodically as well, and they probably will.
I don't think Jason and company are keeping other horror icons from emerging, as the comparative ratio of remakes of 80s films to non-80s-based films is quite low. The issue right now is that icon horror, if that's such a thing, isn't in vogue. With a few exceptions, horror franchises these days aren't really linked to one specific villain. It's the concept that matters. Unfortunately, that doesn't sell halloween masks. So, people continue to hold on to their former icons until new ones can supplant them.
|
|
|
Post by Lebowskidoo 🦞 on Sept 30, 2018 14:55:23 GMT
They can't really go away, slasher films are barely being made anymore. Younger generations have to reach back to those glory days to get their fix.
|
|
egon1982
Sophomore
@egon1982
Posts: 994
Likes: 268
|
Post by egon1982 on Sept 30, 2018 21:52:36 GMT
Although IT 2017 was a success, i wouldn't really call it a "remake" of the 1990 mini-series but a new adaptation of the book just like The Thing (a direct adaptation of the John Campbell novel), Dracula, Frankenstein, the upcoming Pet Sematary, Jekyll and Mr Hyde, Island of Dr Moreau etc. when a true remake is based on an original script and credits the script like The Blob or Night of the Living Dead or Texas Chainsaw Massacre. And Pennywise isn't an original cinematic horror icon as he's a literature icon who was brought to life in the pages of a novel before movies. As adaptations and remakes are different.
Now Freddy Krueger is a purely cinematic original made character created for film and created from an original screenplay as he's a true cinematic horror icon.
Anyone else thinks the guys in the video are right? they feel like real people who aren't blinded by the beauty of Hollywood sometimes and see's what's going on there. To have horror get out of the shitter in the mainsteam is to take a page from the independent studios and independent horror films and foreign horror films with stuff like It Follows, Housebound, The Babadook, Tragedy Girls etc. stop remaking great horror films that don't need to be remade like Poltergeist, stop making sequels to worn out horror franchises, stop prequels etc. independent horror films are out from the shitter known as mainstream when the mainstream should get out of the shitter, look for independent or foreign and say "fuck the mainstream" sometimes as sometimes there is surprises like IT, A Quiet Place etc. and when i'm talking mainstream i mean shit like Poltergeist remake which thankfully bombed and Insidious 4 which didn't do well and dunno why Ouiji a hit, i'm glad people went to see It Follows and some people support that. Enough too much PG-13 stuff like Ouiji but A Quiet Place was excellent and IT was an R rated hit. Remake little known films like Blood Beach or Lifeforce rather than classics like Poltergeist which thankfully bombed but Suspiria looks nice and should be a good remake that is trying something different than be a xerox copy like Poltergeist. They need risks again, take it again mainstream just like the independents are! Paranormal Activity wasn't a risk, stop with the ghost movies, stop with the found footage movies and do something different in the mainstream. Take a page from It Follows. Stop being lazy mainstream horror, get off your fat ass and put down the cheetos or cupcakes down and shoving them in your mouth like Steven Seagal and do something else, start trying to do something unique. Just try something different than another remake of a great movie, sequel to an older franchise, found footage and all that.
I Don't get the hype and praise Halloween 2018 is getting. I will give it a shot. But the fan glad handing worries me a lot. It screams of we don't have that much to add to the franchise, so here's a bunch of homages to make you happy. I don't like the copy and paste scenes from the other sequels (Even though they said that they were ignoring them? They went ahead and took some things from those movies and put them in here... um okay? I don't get why they are doing that, Is it to make us go wow I remember that for nostalgia reasons? If that's the case? Then I can just watch the sequels if I wanna see that.) from the looks of the new trailers.
Michael not being her brother anymore is all they can do. And that shows how limited this franchise has become. Just shut it down already and let it die. But nope. This will be a huge hit and it will spawn more unnecessary sequels and more remakes or sequels that ignore other sequels. Let's make another ANOES remake, How about remake Friday The 13th again? It's already happening with the upcoming Child's Play remake. I just hate the fallout of Halloween 2018 being a hit. For example i am not looking forward to the Child's Play tv series at all. The remake as bad as it probably will be at least it is trying to do something different, and Don Mancini isn't involved. To me personally and Ocpcommunications/Ramboraph4life he's a hack and he has turned the franchise into a joke.
So many people being excited for the same reheated leftovers from the 70's and 80's. What is there to be excited about the new Halloween film movie other than it's another Halloween film, Laurie isn't Michael's brother, Carpenter is back, the score, and the lighting and directing?
What is it about the story that is at all worth telling? The homages are proof that the script doesn't have enough meat on the bone on its own so it homages scene after scene from the sequels to give it a semblance of being fresh just like Jurassic World did. A whole ton of rememberberries. "Do you remember the Silver Shamrock masks? Do you remember the shot in the kitchen in Halloween II?"
I smell bullshit, i was fooled by the "praise" of Curse of Chucky and Cult and those movies pissed me off like Seed and i felt the Child's Play franchise ended with 3 while believe the other sequels are just spin-offs starring Chucky and all that praise does is just kill the franchise and i believe it's dead and Don Mancini is a hack writer/director at this point and lost his touch after 3.
I prefer the Friday The 13th and Elm Street franchises over Halloween as do Ocpcommunications and Ramboraph4life but they with i dig Halloween 1, 2 3, 4 and H2O as i disliked 5/6/Resurrection/remakes and the last Halloween film worth a damn was H2O and that ended the story in my book well. But NOOO they had to make Resurrection only to kill the franchise even the remake with sequel, they are turning this character into a joke since Resurrection and i'm sick/tired of it and so are they. I'm not looking forward to the new movie but might give it a shot same day but not in theaters but maybe when i can rent it when it comes to blu-ray.
The trailers i've seen so far look like the same shit as H2O/4/1/2 in one as it's ignoring the sequels yet "homaging" them in half-assed nostalgia jerking off ways, hypocritical and offering nothing new even in story. Jamie Lee Curtis did this for a paycheck as i can tell she is not having a good time with this as she looks haggard/worn out just like this franchise as it's time she needs to do something new. I don't get the hype or praise! the story is just H2O only 40 years and all that as i've seen it before in other parts of the franchise and the title is lazy i mean "Halloween" with no subtitle and looks like way too much homages which are half-assed. If you saw the second trailer that's the case, there's an entire sequence in the trailer that is a near shot to shot version of a sequence in Halloween 2 1981 only with a different person killed for it's not a homage anymore but a friggin rip off, nothing new and the same regurgitation of the same crap i've seen before in the franchise even the remake.
Every trailer i've seen for this movie makes me less and less interested, the style looks impressive but not the substance for the story as it's style over substance from the looks of it. It's offering nothing new! it's the same as H2O only the sibling plot is removed and i dislike that! i don't need a fake Halloween 2 when i got the real one from 1981 on blu-ray in my boxset from Scream Factory and will soon get the steelbook 4K remastered version of Halloween 2 and 3 soon in the mail. Nick Castle playing the shape again but anyone can play Michael where Michael is like Jason and Leatherface where they are characters who do not need to relay on the character actor playing the character like Robert Englund for Freddy Krueger as you just wear a mask, say nothing and have movements to be a physical presence than a performance. I'm not excited about 78 year old nick castle playing Michael again and Carpenter being involved? i can listen to some music from the soundtrack without having to see the movie. Carpenter involved with the production? probably very limited and him saying "oh it's great" as he said that before about other shit in the last decade as he's tasked with selling the film for what do you think he's gonna do with this franchise? is he gonna say the movie sucks to the media? no he's getting paid and i think it's time Carpenter should do something different than just Halloween, i'd say have him do a film for an independent production company than a bigger studio because they'll just screw him over.
Why should i be excited for Halloween? i am not, at least Zombie did something different with his remake despite i thought the remake was lame as hell. I'm not creaming my face and putting on my michael myers mask and jumpsuit, i don't get it or the hype! it's the 11th film in the franchise and offering nothing new and the same stuff you've seen before with new coat of pant. Danny McBride i enjoyed Eastbound and Down but can he just try something else? i don't think he would work for a horror film as he's better with comedy and there's too many goddamned lazy half-assed homages even to Halloween III which i can just watch Halloween III at home.
If your looking forward to it, that's fine i have no issue with that! i just don't get the hype or praise this movie is getting. People are going to be lining up the door, to see this, but to each their own, yet i hope it's a surprise or the best Halloween in years but i doubt it is. At the same time, i hope it isn't it but if it turns out to be good, i just don't want to see these horror icons (Jason, Freddy, Chucky, Ghostface, Michael, Leatherface, Jigsaw) over and over again on the big screen and your just gonna get diminishing returns just like the Universal monsters being ran into the ground in the 30s/40s/50s as they had huge characters and big hits on their hands then pumped out sequel after another (the only great sequel is Bride of Frankenstein) and the bottom completely fell out with diminishing box-office returns and before these characters became jokes even with Abbot and Costello movies then Universal knew when to quit. If Halloween 2018 becomes a hit then studios will be like "audiences want more Halloween, they want more Candyman, more Freddy, Jason Voorhees etc.", but for Candyman, one Candyman movie was enough as the first was excellent but the sequels were cash-ins and no more Elm Street films, Robert IS Freddy as Jackie proved it was a failure to recast Freddy for you can't do it, Robert IS the character and always was as even Englund said so. Can't we have new horror icons already? let the worn out old tired icons like Freddy, Michael, Jason, Leatherface, Jigsaw, Ghostface, Candyman, Chucky and Pinhead die and rest in peace already, don't keep digging up them from their graves every 5 or 10 or 15 years then propping their corpses up on the big screen in Weekend at Bernies style. Just come up with with your own new horror icon and new horror franchise already! i'm not super big in Insidious and the Conjuring spin-offs but at least it's something different, well not quite different, but not the same old horror franchise some of us seen or the same horror icons for they are trying to create their own. I know they haven't been the best but at least they are giving a damn and giving it an effort, that's just how i feel about it.
Just like in the last decade we got new horror icons in the mainstream like the Creeper, Captain Splauding and Jigsaw while Sam from Trick R Treat becomes a cult horror icon with Leslie Vernon when Trick and Behind the Mask were sent to the DVD direct to video market rather than to all mainstream theaters which should had happened even Hatchet was shown in midnight theaters than all theaters as there's Victor Crawley whom is a cult horror icon. Now outside the mainstream we got Wolfcop, Tucker and Dale etc. should had been released in all theaters.
I'd say end these horror franchises (Chucky/Halloween/Elm Street/Friday The 13th/Saw/Scream/Hellraiser/Texas Chainsaw Massacre) and bury them, let them rest in peace from film and let them live on through merchandise, comics, video games, toys, appreal, streams of the old movies on amazon/hulu/crackle/Netflix whatever even re-issues of the films on blu-ray and that's fair game. Can we have new original cinematic horror icons/new franchises already? try to come up with new horror icons/franchises and try try again mainstream and let the older franchises rest in peace in favor of new franchises/new icons.
I saw Hell Fest which is something different in mainstream horror and a comeback for slasher films, we send the message to studios we want fresh new horror icons and new franchises as that movie has potential to make one.
Yet there is some like me (one who is like a couple of friends on youtube being them some other horror fans who are tired of these same old worn out horror franchises being hurt by these new sequels/remakes hurting the franchises legacy and staining their name to become jokes). Just don't make anymore. That's my advice. The more you make, the longer you keep this franchise sucking the life out of other horror projects and potential franchises. This is like when Universal completely ran their Monsters franchise into the ground, just make new ones already and new icons. Being a fan of these horror franchises/older horror icons is like having a beloved friend who's been on life support for years, some have come to accept they are gone and your just waiting for someone to pull the life support plug.
|
|
Flynn
Sophomore
@flynn
Posts: 515
Likes: 270
|
Post by Flynn on Oct 1, 2018 21:23:29 GMT
egon1982I feel like the distinction between a re-adaptation of a literary work and a remake is more complicated than you are allowing here. Wouldn't you agree that an adaptation like IT (2018) is both an adaptation of a literary work and a remake of its previous cinematic incarnation. Also, aren't all artistic works a reaction to some degree to previous similar works, especially those in the same medium? So, even if the goal of a "remake" is to be a certain kind of thing (like being more faithful to the source material, or perhaps further removed from the source material), isn't it being that thing because of previous adaptations? Thus, in that sense, can't an adaptation of a literary work where there have been previous adaptations be considered a remake of those versions (the word "remake" referring to any kind of subsequent version, even if connections are tenuous)? Sorry, didn't mean to be so Socratic. That's just how my thought process worked.
|
|
egon1982
Sophomore
@egon1982
Posts: 994
Likes: 268
|
Post by egon1982 on Oct 2, 2018 6:16:21 GMT
egon1982 I feel like the distinction between a re-adaptation of a literary work and a remake is more complicated than you are allowing here. Wouldn't you agree that an adaptation like IT (2018) is both an adaptation of a literary work and a remake of its previous cinematic incarnation. Also, aren't all artistic works a reaction to some degree to previous similar works, especially those in the same medium? So, even if the goal of a "remake" is to be a certain kind of thing (like being more faithful to the source material, or perhaps further removed from the source material), isn't it being that thing because of previous adaptations? Thus, in that sense, can't an adaptation of a literary work where there have been previous adaptations be considered a remake of those versions (the word "remake" referring to any kind of subsequent version, even if connections are tenuous)? Sorry, didn't mean to be so Socratic. That's just how my thought process worked. Bring in Sostie here as he's an expert on the differences between an adaptation and a true remake.
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Oct 3, 2018 11:32:34 GMT
egon1982 I feel like the distinction between a re-adaptation of a literary work and a remake is more complicated than you are allowing here. Wouldn't you agree that an adaptation like IT (2018) is both an adaptation of a literary work and a remake of its previous cinematic incarnation. Also, aren't all artistic works a reaction to some degree to previous similar works, especially those in the same medium? So, even if the goal of a "remake" is to be a certain kind of thing (like being more faithful to the source material, or perhaps further removed from the source material), isn't it being that thing because of previous adaptations? Thus, in that sense, can't an adaptation of a literary work where there have been previous adaptations be considered a remake of those versions (the word "remake" referring to any kind of subsequent version, even if connections are tenuous)? Sorry, didn't mean to be so Socratic. That's just how my thought process worked. Bring in Sostie here as he's an expert on the differences between an adaptation and a true remake. I wouldn't say I'm an expert at all. It does bother me that re-adaptations of genre stories are always referred to as "remakes" but, never applied to adaptations of "classics". Baz Luhrman's Romeo & Juliet for instance would never be called a remake of an earlier adaptation. Likewise Scrooge a remake of an earlier version of A Christmas Carol. This all really stems for me from John Carpenter's The Thing constantly being called a remake of The Thing From Another World. It's like denying the existence of the original novella...which is actually what TTFAW seems to do. Hawk's film has very little in common with both the novella and Carpenter's film. Yet it always seems to be credited as the source of (for me) one of the greatest films ever. If anything TTFAW should be remembered not as just a decent slice of 50's scifi, but also as one of the worst book to screen adaptations ever. Anyway, went off on a bit of a tangent/rant there. Back to the earlier point, there are some exceptions that muddy the waters a bit...for instance Van Sant's Psycho
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Oct 3, 2018 11:36:19 GMT
Horror loves to beat a dead horse, though. Well, and then it loves to dismember it, eat parts of it, and make household goods and clothing out of the remainder.
|
|
egon1982
Sophomore
@egon1982
Posts: 994
Likes: 268
|
Post by egon1982 on Oct 4, 2018 1:15:06 GMT
Who agrees these older franchises coming back is like having like that one great grandparents with Alzheimer’s that’s on life support and they keep forgetting who they are and who their family are and you’re just waiting for it to die but you can’t pull the plug because you have no say in the situation because you’re a kid?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2018 6:25:46 GMT
It's already happening with the upcoming Child's Play remake. I just hate the fallout of Halloween 2018 being a hit. For example i am not looking forward to the Child's Play tv series at all. The remake as bad as it probably will be at least it is trying to do something different, and Don Mancini isn't involved. To me personally and Ocpcommunications/Ramboraph4life he's a hack and he has turned the franchise into a joke. Did you watch the ending of 'Cult of Chucky' 'cause if you did I am not sure how you can say the TV show is not trying something different. Apart from Andy and Kyle returning and Kyle being a police officer now Chucky is now human and is possessing Nica's body and Andy and Kyle will have to face Chucky in a human body. For a franchise that has had 7 movies about a possessed doll it is completely different than anything they have done before. Let's not forget the whole part where it was said before if Chucky got a human body he would be an unstoppable warlock.
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Oct 4, 2018 11:30:50 GMT
Bring in Sostie here as he's an expert on the differences between an adaptation and a true remake. I wouldn't say I'm an expert at all. It does bother me that re-adaptations of genre stories are always referred to as "remakes" but, never applied to adaptations of "classics". Baz Luhrman's Romeo & Juliet for instance would never be called a remake of an earlier adaptation. Likewise Scrooge a remake of an earlier version of A Christmas Carol. This all really stems for me from John Carpenter's The Thing constantly being called a remake of The Thing From Another World. It's like denying the existence of the original novella...which is actually what TTFAW seems to do. Hawk's film has very little in common with both the novella and Carpenter's film. Yet it always seems to be credited as the source of (for me) one of the greatest films ever. If anything TTFAW should be remembered not as just a decent slice of 50's scifi, but also as one of the worst book to screen adaptations ever. Anyway, went off on a bit of a tangent/rant there. Back to the earlier point, there are some exceptions that muddy the waters a bit...for instance Van Sant's Psycho Compared to what is above your post, that is a hardly a rant. But Van Sant's Pyscho doesn't muddy the waters at all. It's purely a remake of the movie that doesn't attempt to adapt anything but the film.
|
|